It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama - no quarantine of ebola HC workers

page: 8
29
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bilk22

Can anyone give a valid reason why this shouldn't be done?
Yes. A couple.

1) Because without symptoms there is no contagiousness. It's pointless to quarantine people with no symptoms.

2) Because imposing a quarantine on health workers will discourage them from volunteering provide aid in west Africa.


There is no requirement for symptoms to be present before EBOLA is contagious, that's the biggest cockamamie pile I have heard in a long while. Where in the hell do you get your information? Moveon.org? Armchair doctoring without a license is as bad as yelling fire in a theatre.

EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE:

Symptoms being present do not always flash a big NEON SIGN that tells the world "hey don't panic but I'm contagious right now" anyways.

If the Whitehouse is announcing policy that tells Americans to do things that the presidency usually doesn't say, (like playing doctor for the CDC, then knowing he has a different reason to say it is a 100% sure bet.

edit on 26-10-2014 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

There is no requirement for symptoms to be present before EBOLA is contagious, that's the biggest cockamamie pile I have heard in a long while.
The evidence says you are wrong.


Symptoms being present do not always flash a big NEON SIGN that tells the world "hey don't panic but I'm contagious right now" anyways.
No. But with ebola they do tell someone they are sick. And if a health care worker who has been in Liberia starts to feel sick they will probably seek medical attention in quite a hurry.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I've said it before and I'll say it again... There isn't a need for people to start running through the streets like Chicken Little with the sky falling, but if we keep treating this disease as nothing more than something like chicken pox we might wind up a wee bit shocked and a whole lot dead before all of this is said and done.

The thing is, they might not be showing symptoms, but by the time they do they've been all over town, kissed babies in the park, went bowling, held a fundraiser, rode 10 different subways, etc. Then we are stuck looking for all of the people they've made contact with. Crossing our fingers the whole time.

Why an "over abundance of caution" for one thing and absolutely no caution on another? It makes no sense.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



I'm bumping your post because I could only give you one star, when I wanted to give 10 stars or more.
So, I deem this post is worth re-reading. Nothing like common sense, is there?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Fair enough, but I just asked a doctor this very question and they were surprised it is being played down like it is because the line is and can be very thin when detecting symptoms for a multitude of virus's and determining contagiousness. Usually contagiousness is not de3termined in any degree of finality based on measured or observed symptoms..

Based on this alone, I think it shows there is a different reason for the Whitehouse getting their nosy beaks into things like this.

Erring on the side of caution when it comes to disease outbreaks is 100% what the government usually does. This by the Whitehouse is a very blatant break in that pattern. Obama and every other totalitarian have traditionally stuck their noses in every kind of thing though, which would explain it, sort of like North Korea politics of presenting themselves with the worlds best country for supporting human rights.


edit on 26-10-2014 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: butcherguy



This disease is really hard to catch.

Unless you are exposed to the vomit, blood, and diarrhea of patients.


How about spit, snot, urine, semen and sweat?

All the above combined are bodily fluids, sweat probably being the most commonly spread around, casually.

We already know the latent traces of any of these fluids can harbour the virus on any surface for hours, days or weeks, depending on the ambient temperature and exposure to the sun's direct rays..

Hard to catch?...Pfffft!
Why take the risk, when facing such a lethal killer?


Are you being selective here, in order to win your point? If so, why?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

May I ask a question?

Do you think North America is safe from an epidemic from Ebola?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigent
a reply to: Phage

You forget sweat, semen, saliva, urine and milk



Hahaha! I forgot the milk in my post.
But on the other hand, you forgot the snot in yours.!



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I don't think it's pointless to quarantine people who are not displaying symptoms.I think it's very pointful,and if that word does'nt exist,it should,for such occasions.The whole point of quarantine is to ensure that symptoms do not develop while the individual is in a social setting,surrounded by people who could be infected by said individual.

It's better to err on the side of caution,when dealing with a disease that has the potential to basically liquefy a person,and the highly contagious liquefaction seeps out of evey orifice,while they're vomiting uncontrollably.In such a scenario erring on the side of caution is the only sane and sensible thing to do.

If an individual is prepared and brave enough to go work in an ebola-stricken area,they should also have the balls to hack 21 days of quarantine.If they do not,I foresee dire difficulties for that individual,as to coping with pretty much unspeakable horror.

If they are willing to inconvenience themselves to the extent that they will take the huge risk of going into the hot zone to try and save lives,I don't see why they should have a problem with correctly and sanely completing the tour of duty they undertook.

If they are willing to inconvenience themselves to the extent that they will go into the hot zone to try and Stop the spread of ebola-it beggars belief that they would mind the quarantine period that would drastically lessen the risk of themselves Spreading it in their home country.a reply to: Phage



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Came across this research paper about it:


www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




The benefit of quarantine is at the first sign of symptoms she can be monitored by trained professionals immediately.
At the first sign of symptoms a health care worker would be monitored by trained professionals immediately even if they aren't under quarantine. A health care worker is a trained professional, btw.

You know that the New York and New Jersey quarantine is a home quarantine, right?


Those trained professionals are prohibited by law from treating themselves. I'm quite sure there are good reasons for such laws and they revolve around the fact that they can't be trusted to be objective in such a case. That's why they need to be monitored by other professionals in a quarantine setting.
edit on 26-10-2014 by diggindirt because: clarity



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

they like to play that one down and the one with the pigs and monkeys.
in that they showed it possible , that transmission can be accomplished via airborne from pigs to monkeys.
they say that it nothing to worry about because it has not been documented that it can spread by humans this way.
like i said just because it hasn't been documented doesn't mean it can't or hasn't yet.

this also shows that pigs are susceptible to the virus.

i forgot to say they used the Zaire Ebolavirus strain.
edit on 26-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)


ETA: i need to correct myself, they said that transmission is likely occurred one of three ways, airborne, droplet, or fomites.
here a link to article about it i haven't found the link that i used for the paper i'll see if i can find it.



While the study provided evidence that transmission of Ebola between species is possible, researchers still cannot say for certain how that transmission actually occurred. There are three likely candidates for the route of transmission: airborne, droplet, or fomites.

Airborne and droplet transmission both technically travel through the air to infect others; the difference lies in the size of the infective particles. Smaller droplets persist in the air longer and are able to travel farther- these droplets are truly “airborne.” Larger droplets can neither travel as far nor persist for very long. Fomites are inanimate objects that can transmit disease if they are contaminated with infectious agents. In this study, a monkey’s cage could have been contaminated when workers were cleaning a nearby pig cage. If the monkey touched the contaminated cage surface and then its mouth or eyes, it could have been infected.
From Pigs to Monkeys, Ebola Goes Airborne


edit on 27-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Exactly. I'd rather the first signs be had while in quarantine period than have first signs come while out in public.

It's common sense. How many times have you been at work and there's a bug going around and all seem fine then one day bam, everyone is catching it. No warning, no signs. But one day there ya go. Passing from worker to worker, fam to fam, public to public.

At the first idea of any kind of bug going around, I am taking the strongest precautions and taking zinc and vit c and day quil and so on and trying to stay away from others I work with as much as possible. Still catch it.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:04 AM
link   
I read this entire thread and Phage has the most trustworthy responses supported by authoritative sources.

The rest of you are exacerbating the situation through coattail fear response. There's also no conspiratory element to this whatsoever. Politicians shouldn't be making uninformed decisions based on nothing. I completely support the President (calm cool collective).

I suggest you write letters to your state reps instead of posting on here, scaring the s*** out of folks. Be ashamed.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: gorsestar




I read this entire thread and Phage has the most trustworthy responses supported by authoritative sources.


if spouting out the party line is "trustworthy responses supported by authoritative sources" then yea i guess he does.




The rest of you are exacerbating the situation through coattail fear response. There's also no conspiratory element to this whatsoever. Politicians shouldn't be making uninformed decisions based on nothing. I completely support the President (calm cool collective).


if you don't see or smell something here you need to have your eyes and sense of smell checked.



I suggest you write letters to your state reps instead of posting on here, scaring the s*** out of folks. Be ashamed


i have,and i'm not



edit on 27-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie


if you don't see or smell something here you need to have your eyes and sense of smell checked


The only things deceptive going on are these governors politicizing the situation for votes.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
Actually, the math says that the current rate of spread in Africa is the same as the flu. We also have herd immunity and vaccination against the flu, we don't aginst Ebola. I understand what you are saying but the data does not support your statement of risk. Currently, your statement is equally as likely to be wrong based on the data. Models of what it can do in Africa provide information about the virus, it does not rationalize 1st world country , oops I can't do this or that... The protocol states "I "can't be shed till x temperature so that's how " I "will behave. the virus is adapting and it does not seem unreasonable to limit unnecessary risks and reach some sort of level of respect for the virus itself and safety for all involved. The dangers of this virus are in plain English in the references below and I think all involved , especially health care workers, CDC, WHO, scientists, etc.. Need to do their part and stop taking unnecessary risks, but that's this humble scientists opinion and wish..., I don't expect everyone to give a crap or think the same. The data is there to help make good decisions.

the mutations that are happening are very significant in terms of the infection mechanism of this virus variant as well as in terms of rate that’s never been seen before in previous outbreaks. Ebola Mutation Rate: Analysis of the available research suggests that the Ebola 2014 virus is currently mutating at a rate 200% to 300% higher than historically observed (Gire, 2014). Furthermore, the Ebola-2014 virus's mutation rate of 2.0 x 10−³ subs/site/year is nearly identical to Influenza A's mutation rate of 1.8 x 10−³ subs/site/year (Jenkins, 2002). This means Ebola 2014 is mutating as fast as seasonal flu.

DISCLAIMER to make sure you note and understand exactly what these scientist demonstrate with this research and what they CAN NOT SAY!!
This paper contains no evidence (for or against) alternate modes of transmission for Ebola, nor is this paper postulating that genetic changes have impacted EVD clinical presentation (although evidence for this has started to emerge). This paper is simply demonstrating what appears to be a rapid rate of evolution in the Ebola 2014 Virus. Many recent Ebola viral mutations have been synonymous mutations, some have been in intergenic regions, while others are non-synonymous substitutions in protein-coding regions. All have unknown impact at the present time. Such questions should be the subject of future scientific research. This article simply points out that Ebola in 2014 is undergoing rapid mutation and adaptation. The future implications of Ebola's rapid evolution are unclear.
www.operonlabs.com.../20

The big idea from all these references below is that as the virus adapts to its new niche it does so with one end goal, maximize their infectivity , or another way to think of it is the best fit for their human host.
I think the greatest significance is what they summarize in terms of transmission and diagnostic reliability of current tests. It is very unlikely that the mutations would all of a sudden accumulate into an entire new mode of transmission as that’s not normally seen. The speculation about it becoming airborne like the flu is due to the following reason that the ebola virus contains similar fusion proteins. This mechanisms of membrane fusion is seen in enveloped viruses such as influenza, HIV, or Ebola when they enter their respective host cells. ebola is also very different in many ways, for example, more than one virus particle can enter a host cell.

Science jargon describing these proteins in case you want to look it up further. tammlab.medicine.virginia.edu...
virus outer viral 'fusion proteins' (GP) spikes resemble that of influenza. This is expected as both are believed to be Class I fusion proteins...Both are also homotrimers and undergo pH-dependent conformational change in the late endosome. The interaction of fusion proteins with the endosome is how these viruses 'trick' their way out of the late endosome, which in practice means these viruses pop out of the cellular 'trash can' and into the cytoplasm. (SIB, 2014)
www.operonlabs.com...


IMPORTANT TO THE DESIGN OF THE STUDY AND TO NOTE IS THAT THIS WAS DONE THE FIRST 78 DAYS OF OUTBREAK in Sierra Leone!! Another important fact is that the repeated samples from same patients allowed for looking at the virus when they got infected as well as what it ended up as genetically after reproducing massively in the same patient during the infection. As they said, “clearer view into how the virus can change in a single individual over the course of infection”.
The question that’s hot is what has it done since last March!!
This current rate of mutations may be driven by the fact human to human transmission is resulting in mutations needed for adapting to this new host. Historically, the previous outbreaks have been small and this certainly affects something called antigenic drift. The benefit of a high mutation rate in Ebola 2014 is different -- the genetic changes in Ebola-2014 allow for rapid exploration of the entire fitness landscape in a brand new host -- humans. See infographic on this site ( I dont know how to insert the damn image!!!) www.operonlabs.com.../20.

The problem is that accumulated Ebola mutations will scale with the size of the population infected. Which is why its so important to stop this at its source. ” The idea that the Ebola-2014 Virus jumped species, but is now somehow 'static' or 'frozen in time' is a mistake. The Ebola-2014 virus is undergoing a period of rapid adaptation in human hosts, as evidenced by the Ebola RNA sequences deposited in Genbank, and the studies referenced with this article. Hopefully, interventions (like contact tracing) will be able to stop Ebola-2014 before the virus optimizes its genotype” .

Up to four different Ebola-2014 viral sub-clades (groups of genetically related Ebola isolates) have circulated between humans since the onset of the 2014 Ebola outbreak.
As the number of people affected by the 2014 Ebola outbreak has grown, so has the number of Ebola unique viral mutations and unique viral genetic lineages. We can expect Ebola 2014 viral lineages to grow as some function f(i) proportional to the number of people infected with Ebola
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...





edit on 27-10-2014 by bella2256 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-10-2014 by bella2256 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-10-2014 by bella2256 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Well,our apologies if this ugly nasty ol' thwead scared the s**t out of you,awww.We are talking sensibly about erring on the side of caution when it comes to a very ugly,very deadly disease.And politicians,Especially presidents, Should be sensible and have their citizens' best interests at heart.They Should have the plain goshdarn ol' "sense God gave 'em" and err on the side of caution when it comes to a highly fatal disease that through lack of a simple action like quarantining health workers,could backfire on their citizenry.

Btw,being sensible is not being afraid.It's not running around like an off-head chicken.It's making logical,sensible plans.I have to say,You were starting to sound a teensy bit hysterical towards the end of your post..well maybe just frayed round the edges-but then this thread apparently Does have the potential to scare the crap outa people.

Just like ebola,along with all the blood+slime and..well nevermind.Now let me go find a quiet corner where I can peacefully sit and be ashamed.A nice day to you:-)!



a reply to: gorsestar



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: gorsestar

that could be one.
but there is some reason their not quarantining the people. now i know that people say that the flu is way worse and kills more than ebola, but the flu doesn't have the mortality rate that ebola does. they had vaccines for others strains they were using and were testing new ones.yet the CDC and the WHO went as far as recommending no unnecessary travel to mexico.

here is a article for the swine flu that says it had only a 0.02% mortality rate.



(Reuters) - At least one in five people worldwide were infected with swine flu during the first year of the 2009-2010 H1N1 pandemic, an international research group said on Friday, but the death rate was just 0.02 percent.
Swine flu infected 1 in 5, death rate low, study shows


ebola has last i saw was a 70% mortality rate with no known antivirus or cure that is effective. but still not quarantining people coming from those areas where the virus is. something is not right.
edit on 27-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: gorsestar

you may want to consider removing some of the fluoride out of you system
and maybe a little less TV time

i wouldn't really consider this thread fear mongering...more like concerned trying to get a better perspective of what is going on....



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: bella2256

BS

You plagiarized this article from beforeitsnews.com

here




top topics



 
29
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join